“The most successful organizations in the world are the ones who work together, play together, and get messy together.”

=

Jeanne Malnati

——————–

Well.

This may sound a little wacky but 98.2% of successful businesses are successful because, uhm, there is some conflict <note: I made up the 98.2% but you get the point>.

Suffice it to say conflict, in and of itself, doesn’t make them successful. It is that the conflict tends to create the positive friction which sparks better thinking, better ideas and a better company — in other words — a more enlightened organization.

I often argue that conflict within an organization is natural … and healthy. Conflict is natural because while organizations try and create some ‘tidiness’ to the institution itself … the people within are messy. Inherent in this messiness is a clashing of certainty & uncertainty, known & unknown, learning & unlearning and all the messy things thinking people do when all are aimed toward a greater vision, purpose & objective.

We often like to talk about business as ‘rational’, effective within organizational constructs and boundaries of behavior & rules, but, c’mon, Life itself is pretty messy — outcomes may be uncertain and people, particularly in business, can certainly be irrational <at times>. In addition, truth itself is messy. I mention that because if there is one thing every business seeks in their pursuit of success, it is ‘truth’ with regard to “what do we need to do.”

Regardless. It is quite possible the messiest part of any business is found in the simple objective of getting good shit done. It’s mostly messy because, once again, people are messy.

Messy in terms of how we interact.

Messy in terms of not knowing what we are good at … and sometimes not standing up for what we really are good at.

Messy in terms of inconsistent communication.

Messy in terms of selective listening.

Messy in terms of … well … our attempts to avoiding conflict <we can turn ourselves into pretzels trying to keep things as smooth as possible>.

Now. That may sound like a shitload of messiness, but it is simply a natural state of things — people, once again, naturally make business messy.

Oh. Even people with good intentions are messy.

Yes. Even good people.

Throughout my business career:

I have enjoyed a “force of nature” person who has forced enlightenment for the force of good.

I have endured a force of nature person with good intentions …with less than good behavior … who has forced us to face enlightenment.

I have encountered an essential force of good within a business … who doesn’t have the ‘nature’ part of the ‘force’ DNA … but is still an essential undercurrent force with which the business prospers by enabling enlightenment.

And the entire experience has emboldened me with a sense that even good organizations with good products and good people and a good idea can be messy AND enlightened AND be a force of good.

Yeah. Sure. I have also seen how messiness can negatively encroach into the good fiber of a business with bad conflict. But the one thing I can guarantee is messiness with good conflict will lead to enlightenment. It is just that I cannot guarantee whether it will be enlightenment used for the force of good or enlightenment used for the force of, well, something less than good.

Regardless.

All this messiness leads to Enlightened conflict. Enlightened Conflict is a term I often use <heck … it is the name of my site>. To me it has multiple dimensions of relevance to not only to what I believe & what I believe should be done, but what research shows creates a smarter thinking individual <and individuals> and, inevitably, a smarter version of collaboration <one driven to sharpen ideas rather than compromise on dull mediocrity>.

So.

A lot of people push back on the “conflict” part. Here’s the basic idea. The more someone understands <or is less ignorant> the more respectful the “conflict” will be. Conflict can be debate, discussion or simply when two people have different points of view on things. It’s the basic thesis being challenged, navigating a crisis <the conflict>, antithesis all ultimately arriving at some synthesis. Its not a novel idea nor a contentious idea. But it IS an idea which empowers a business. Unfortunately, it is also an idea which many people suggest creates negativity.

Anyway. The positive side of enlightened conflict resides in the sharing of information so that people just know more. And I would hope <and actually believe> they use that additional “know more” <knowledge of some type> so they can make better informed choices. Conversely … I could suggest that the enemy of ignorance is enlightened conflict. I often suggest people think about that because I could argue <and I do> that one of the biggest obstacles to any progress, in business & in Life, is ignorance.

Well. The one thing I can guarantee is that Enlightened conflict aggressively attacks ignorance. Therefore, any business with an enlightened conflict future will inevitably have smarter discussions, more respectful competition between employees <and better teamwork>, become more informed and, ultimately, create better decisions. And, maybe best of all, in their own way the business organization itself <model, organizational structure & roles/responsibilities definitions> becomes more enlightened.

Look. When I speak of enlightened conflict with businesses I am relentless with regard to my belief that little actions can make a big difference. I do that because I believe as long as you empower individuals to embrace enlightened conflict, and respectful conflict, you empower everyone to believe they are all architects of life … and fate.

All that said. I admit. I, personally, love a great debate and I typically feast on partially ignorant point of views. I am not that smart but I can spot a generalization or a sweeping judgment a mile away. I am kind of like a vulture lurking over ignorance seeking to swoop down for the debate.

It also helps that I am a curious vulture. I like to think and lurk over a variety of topics. On a separate note I am biased in that I believe businesses, and society, would be a better version of its current form if there were more curious vultures.

To conclude.

At least I have admitted being a vulture. Don’t let that stop you from loving the idea of Enlightened Conflict.

Life, and business, is messy. I would argue the only way to attempt to find a path through the messiness is to wade into the conflict, embrace your enlightenment throughout the engagement and, well, make whatever you can a little less messy.

Well. There is a lot of talk in the business world about how creativity has been squashed by data, numbers and an unhealthy pursuit of efficiency. All is true. However, to rediscover creativity I believe its helpful to think about how fearless you have to be to actually BE creative. Creativity is a tricky thing. Originality is an objective but less important than not copying. Inherent in almost every creative idea are elements of something that already exists or has been done.

I say all that because, having been involved in the creativity business in some form for over 20 years, I recognize that the best of the creative best are part insecure and part fearless. And it’s the fearless part that I am going to write about because I saw this quote somewhere.

—————

“I seek fearless work that challenges me”

Martha Graham

——————–

This is good stuff.

This is the kind of stuff not for the faint of heart.

And, frankly, this is the kind of stuff for few people, but, I can pretty much guarantee its at the essence of every great creative mind. Why? Because this quote is indicative of someone whose heart lies in doing fearless work.

Oh.

Fearless work means being fearless of failure.

Fearless work does NOT mean doing something wacky just for wacky sake.

Oh. But that is the first thing people who condone fearless work bring up.

You hear words like “stupid” or “what were they thinking” or “I could have told them it wouldn’t work <or be popular or be liked>.” In my mind those are words of people who fear work that looks fearless. This fear can be disguised as a variety of things … discomfort in something new … misunderstanding … lack of ability to recognize something.

Whatever.

This is about people who actually DO the fearless work. Because people who seek to do fearless work recognize several things:

– how difficult it is (even though it may seem simple to the creators)

– how unpopular it may be

– when to stop being unpopular (the guard rails in fearless creativity)

In fact. I am going to use someone else who pursued fearless work to make the point. Kristen Hersh (one of the founding members of The Throwing Muses). As a teen (just to make another point that teens can often be wiser beyond their years) she said this about the difficulty of pursuing fearless work:

——————-

“Do you know how hard it is to not know how to sound like other bands? There aren’t any lessons to teach you how to do this and no one can help us figure out what <to play>. It’s hard to learn something that no one can teach you.”

Kristen Hersh

———————–

Actually. I wish I could share this with anyone who is critical of any original idea so they could think about the fact someone is doing something that was self taught because there is realistically no one to teach someone what has not been done before. Sometimes fearless work is difficult, and defined, by the fact you are forging your own path. There are certainly some principles you can stand upon and some rigor of thought you can apply, but, there are no lessons, there are no rules & there are no real guardrails. In fact. The real difficulty is knowing when to put up your own guard rails. Knowing when to stop innovating and just be creative with fearless work.

Kristen, as a 19 year old teen, pursued fearless work and did some amazing stuff (along with her fellow teen and musical genius in her own right – Tonya Donnelly).

Anyway. I think the fearless ones tend to hear and see things the rest of us don’t. In simplistic terms it is only popular in their own heads. And unfortunately for the fearless there is only a minority who truly understands what they are doing:

(Kristen Hersh) … “but we play unpopular music.”

(producer) …

“that’s exactly what you play because you’re inventing something. You’re gonna be hugely influential.”

I do believe the best of the fearless best recognize that what they do may be initially unpopular to the majority. It is an uncomfortable position to be in because ideas are fragile and affirmation often makes it less fragile (people too).

The fearless just forge ahead. They may not like it. They may not embrace it. But they understand it. And fight their way through it.

Because it is a fact. All the truly influential fearless creators didn’t have it easy early on. They were creating something – inventing something. In their fearless work they were paving the way for people to think differently, see differently and just experience something different. Yeah, I know, that is what being influential is all about. But that doesn’t make it any easier. Now. While fearless work is often unpopular initially there is a difference between bad unpopular and influential unpopular. Good fearless is about understanding how to put up the right guardrails. Oh. Yeah. Those guard rails.

So how do the fearless know when to stop innovating?

———————

“when you start to suck, stop”

Kristen Hersh

———————-

Sounds simple, but it is not. I believe the best of the fearless best have an internal quality control. Conversely, in the mind’s of the ‘less mature’ innovative thinking maybe the guard rails are less defined. But. In the best of the fearless best they have that inner barometer to recognize what sucks and what doesn’t suck.

Oh. And before we start putting too much weight on ‘less mature’ and associating it with age I would like to remind you that Kristen said this last quote when she was 19 (oh, these smart teens as I like to remind those wise stodgy adults).

Like I just said.

The best of the fearless best have an inner barometer. They are born with it. They are born with the guardrails.

But this doesn’t mean there isn’t fear.

Even the fearless creative people have fear.

Everyone has fear (lest we forget).

————————–

“We fear the idea of something more than the thing itself.”

Steve Chandler

——————

Fearless work means loving the idea of something more than fearing the thing itself. I imagine that thought encapsulates most good things in life. But in this case those who pursue fearless work have overcome their fear in pursuit of what is good fearless work.

Anyway.

Today’s business world needs more people to pursue fearless work. To fearlessly create beautiful ideas that may make some people feel uncomfortable. We need these fearless people because they have a ripple effect beyond their own work. They influence how the rest of us look at ALL things. I do worry a little bit because I know these people exist but I am not sure a business world exists for them to exist in. We say we want more creativity, more risk, more fearlessness and, yet, the business word does not reward creativity, risk or fearlessness. I do worry a little bit because those who DO create fearless work live in an insecure world and if the business world does nothing to offer a security safety net being fearless can become an almost insurmountable daunting challenge.

My personal thought?

If you are fearless, all you can do is …

Act.

Do.

Create.

Discover your fear, face it and seek your own version of fearless work. In the end maybe we are lucky enough to positively influence people. And, at its best, maybe we actually be influential. And, of course, maybe something fearless we do will create the change necessary for the next fearless work to be done.

“The world is too big and too intricate to conform to our ideas of what it should be like.

Just because we invent myths and theories to explain away the chaos we’re still going to live in a world that’s older and more complicated than we’ll ever understand.”

————

Moby

===========

“The World is a very complex system.

It is easy to have too simple a view of it, and it is easy to do harm and to make things worse under the impulse to do good and make things better.”

—-

Kenneth Boulding

==========

Well. Today, while reading some trite business fortune cookie wisdom pulled from some gazzillion selling business book, I thought of the day I said “I worry we are killing the next generation of business thinkers with simplistic tripe” to a famous internationally renowned business book author. I did it at while on a panel at some convention. I said it <after holding my thoughts for too long> as I listened to simplistic soundbite advice being shared under the guise of “sage wisdom to enhance everyone’s success.”

I followed my statement with …

“Business is messy. Business is complex. It seems to me that those of us who have navigated the messiness have a responsibility to not undersell the messiness & complexity nor oversell simplicity.” <Me>

Needless to say … it wasn’t one of my more popular moments.

Needless to say … it was one of my better professional moments.

Ok. Business is made up of a mixture of skills, personalities and attitudes. Success is most often dictated by alignment of skills, personalities and attitudes, or, some special mix of all. It is that mix, or blend, of all those things which is well, frankly, an absolute bitch to make happen.

That said. Let me point out three reasons why business is such a difficult complex unwieldy thing and trite soundbite wisdom rarely helps:

Building a successful business is rarely about some wide open “white space” awaiting your arrival.

People … you almost always have to incorporate people into your evil plan for success <and those who most desperately desire to help most often have their own evil plans for success>

Dealing with what you have is significantly different than creating what you want <and how the initial recipe is different than the ongoing recipe>

Let me explain each.

The white space myth:

Business success, generally speaking, comes down to one of two things (a) am I going to build a market for my idea, or (b) am I going to steal some of the existing market for my idea. Needless to say neither of those sits in some dormant white space awaiting your presence.

You either create white space by elbowing some asshats out of your way or simply walk through the front door of the homes of others and steal all their shit <that was a metaphor … you do not really do that>. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try and be different or offer some unique aspects <if you can> but more often than not it is all about being sure you are distinct, be relentlessly persistent in communicating your distinctness … and offer something that delivers value after it is purchased.

Uhm. No trite soundbites there and I have pretty much told you everything you need to know.

People who want to help <but you shouldn’t let them>:

Help is always available. And self proclaimed ‘disruptive/innovative’ help almost even more so. Pick a topic and go online. I can almost guarantee you will get over a million results <you actually get 31.8 million in .59 seconds> of people discussing “disruptive” ideas to facilitate progress. Many of those people are for hire. The majority are smart, articulate and have boundless energy, uhm, for their version of progress.

Finding people who assist in forwarding the progress of your idea is, frankly, not easy <although it seems like it should be>. Even more difficult is incorporating change agents or what we far too often call disrupters. It is challenging … tempting for sure … but challenging.

Soundbite experts will throw out a gazillion people management thoughts on ‘center everyone on the purpose’ and a shitload of ‘horizon direction focus’ thinking … but I gotta tell ya. I can put the biggest fucking beautiful target up on the wall to aim for but if the people I got cannot, and will not, shoot arrows at it — the target is a beautiful piece of art on the wall and nothin’ else.

Deals and creation:

Soundbite advisors spend a shitload of their energy on ‘bringing your idea to life.’ Not a whole shitload of them invest a lot of energy discussing “what do I do once it is actually breathing.” In other words … what the hell do I do with this Frankenstein?

Huh? What experts neglect to tell you is that all that fine planning and smart implementation rarely ends up creating exactly what you intended creating in the beginning. You will naturally adapt to some things and course correct the best you can as you navigate survival.

At its most basic creating is about making some deals, and dealing with, reality as it gets thrown in your face and at your feet <this means you can trip over a shitload of things>. Some people call this “adapting”, I do not, I call it deal making with the world. Maybe think of creating business like striking a nuclear arms-control agreement. Simplistically the deal is the means, not the end itself, and success simply means everyone keeps their nukes they just don’t use them. But the real point is that business is rarely developed with “dealing” central to success. It is more often the idea <which motivates the energy and company/business>. Deals are simply the way you protect the business idea. What soundbite is there for how to navigate the typical business idea of “mutually beneficial transactions?”

There is none.

You deal with … well … dealing one by one the best you can all the while trying to not lose sight of the desired objective <which can be covered in a deep fog on occasion>.

Anyway.

The next generation of business leaders deserve experienced people who attempt to explain complexity rather than serve up trite simplistic soundbites which over time simply amount to a steaming pile of bullshit. While I have a bunch of concerns with regard to what we are, and are not, teaching the next generation of business thinkers the one I am mostly concerned with resides in the simplistic shit shared by multimillion dollar business authors and the hundreds of books you can buy which all offer “simplistic advice for business success.”

There is absolutely nothing simple about business. Misrepresenting reality, the business truth, should be called out and chastised even if it is some high falutin’ author of famous business books. We owe it to the next generation of thinkers to teach the complex and not some trite soundbites. That is, as I mentioned earlier, the deal we need to make with the reality of the business future.

I don’t really believe in fate. And it appears good ole HW Longfellow didn’t believe in it either. He wrote a beautiful poem called The Builders (see below) suggesting that we, the people, are architects of fate.

In fact.

The beauty of what he writes (and this is a truly awesome thought) is that everyone does something, no matter how small or how large, that builds the structure of life. Yes. Every one of us, each and every one, plays some role in constructing the great construct of Life we all live in. That is a really nice thought. And a nice reminder that no matter how inconsequential we may feel or the things we do we play a part in the tapestry of life.

Now.

This is also true in business. I say that as a business guy with a long history in the service side of the business world.

The side of the world that you often feel helpless, often having to react, and often being forced to move about at the whim of someone else, and often feeling like you are not really doing anything important (because it is hard to see how what you are doing really matters).

Having said that and knowing that a lot of people really do feel this way I pull Architects of Fate out of my backpack. I use this poem several times with companies to remind us, employees, that all our actions have consequences. Yes. Even the smallest actions.

Longfellow’s words should encourage everyone to believe each action contributes to the structure of who we are as a company and what we do. Now THAT is a valuable thought in every organizational behavior or culture sense. It is an even more important valuable thought a leader should have (because if they do they will inevitably encourage all employee to feel that way).

And when everything is aligned. When everyone believes they can be an architect. It becomes a valuable thought in encouraging each employee to understand that their actions contribute to the architecture of the fate of the organization (no matter how inconsequential they may actually feel buried down in the mailroom or the bottomless pit of account receivables department or the office manager ordering heavy stock paper for the copier because someone is bitching).

I would also point out the practical side – productivity & output. It was my good friend Luke Sullivan who pointed this out in his book “hey whipple squeeze this” – thinking & creating matters but if there is no output there is no satisfaction. Real work. Actual things we do for customers or actions we take in front of customers. Each of these actions is a part of the overall tapestry of the architecture of the company. He also points out that each action often begets another action (in that once you have done something once it begins to feel more ‘okay’ to do it again … I would call that a slippery slope discussion).

Anyway.

As we hustle our way through each day trying to make sure we cross off everything on our to do lists and make our bosses happy and answer customer’s questions and requests it is good to remind ourselves we are truly architects of fate. It is good to remind people tht everything they do contributes to the grater architecture of what is and, maybe most importantly, what will be.

This pertains to your job, personal lie and the greater Life in general.

“Anyone who believes that we’re just going to leap into some sort of glorious new age is very unrealistic … far-reaching turmoil can be expected, as individuals and institutions either adapt to, or resist, change.”

=========

So.

Leadership is a tricky thing. It is walking a fine line of truth (grounded in what is real as well as ‘not lying’) and aspirational (giving people a glimpse of what they can be).

And, as with anything, this is about some functional practical things and emotional soul searching things.

Oh.

And connecting them. It is the connection aspect that great leaders do well. But, ultimately, those leaders who figure it out end up leading high energy, high performance organizations. I tend to believe when you see an organization that ‘thinks small’ (or acts small) it is because their leaders do.

Regardless.

Just as I wrote recently about the fact we are in the ‘selling hope’ business I tend to believe great organizational cultures are also grounded on hope. Hope for being better. Being a better person. Being better at what you may do daily (even the smallest task). Being part of something that betters the world. Great organizations, at their core, feed their people’s hope. And great leaders figure out a way of showing them that hope.

In practical terms and aspirational terms.

All that said … leads to me to some words that made me think about this.

Sam Meek. Sam was the CEO of of the advertising agency J. Walter Thompson in the 50’s/60’s. And the words below were delivered in a 1965 speech. Within the following words there are little scraps of hope littered throughout for people to pick and choose from.

Scraps of the practical.

Scraps of aspirational.

Scraps of lessons that can be implemented daily in actions.

All littered on a ground of a solid attitude focused on the horizon.

These are words that make you feel good about being part of the organization and yet words to challenge every one to be better and work harder (“we are a permanently dissatisfied company”). I am not above stealing great words and reapplying them. I use these words all the time and, frankly, I seek to work within organizations that like these words:

===

When I talk of this company, I am not thinking just of a legal or business entity. I am using the word in the older sense, as in a company of scholars, as a company of adventurers, or a company of voyagers. I think our companionship partakes of all these things.

There had to be something special about this enterprise to attract the talented and venturesome people who have come together to exercise their considerable talents and to derive from it the things that make for full and satisfying life.

Our relationships are subtle and highly sensitive relationships ….

Our job must be to share authority without losing it …

The whole staff must have a proprietary feeling about the company’s work.

We are a permanently dissatisfied company and so far as I can see, we shall not run out of things to be dissatisfied about. I think our work, in most instances, is the best of its kind in the world – and yet not good enough. Not as good as it is going to be. There has not been and there should never be a year when it is not better than the year before.

Our audience is getting more demanding all the time – it is not a question of talking down to them. The problem, the opportunity, is to talk far enough up to them.

===

Lastly.

I use one line from what Meeks said over and over again. I am not sure I have ever seen nor heard words from a leader that captured the essence of both functional practical and aspirational better than these:

“We must be dynamic for purposes bigger than ourselves.“

I admit. I absolutely hate when an organization “thinks small.” That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t think practical but they should think about impact. What kind of impact, or imprint, do they truly want to make. And I don’t necessarily mean making people’s lives better. I mean ‘doing good or great shit.’ Making an impact through what they do and who they are as an organization. Impacting whatever world they affect. It doesn’t have to be global (like a JWT) but it can be local or even within their own circle of friends & business relationships.

Creating a great organization, a company of adventures, needs leaders who say, who mean, who live, these types of words.

And all words that are said within a truth that it isn’t rhetoric but rather it is the soul of the organization.

Be dynamic.

Whew.

That alone is a great thought. A great thought for an individual, a leader and even an organization. I admit I often struggle with the current focus on “purpose driven” organizations but I never struggle with “dynamic.”